Re: A89: Re: Perverted :)

To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A89: Re: Perverted :)
From: ComAsYuAre@aol.com
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 20:21:19 EST
Delivered-To: assembly-89-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org

In a message dated 12/4/98 20:19:37 Eastern Standard Time, justin-b@juno.com
writes:

> The organization idea is very intriguing, but how will the reviewers be
>  compensated for their efforts?  Why might they work for free when the
>  programmers whose games they are approving are making money?  To account
>  for this, I propose that any programmers submitting thieir games for
>  approval should pay some sort of fee, but no more than $5 or $10.  Also,
>  this committee shouldn't be greater than five people, who each review it
>  based on a clear and meaningful definition of excellence.

i say it's all nice in theory but it'll never happen.  if somebody wants to
charge, they have the right to charge. nobody else has the right to say they
can't, and it's gonna stay that way.  besides, it's basically impossible to
make money off this stuff anyway.  you all know right out that nobody's gonna
pay for a ti calculator game, no matter how good it is.  just forget about it.

Follow-Ups:

Re: A89: Re: Perverted :)

From: Eric Meeks <shaggy@popi.net>